I thought that Fokker developed this one in Germany ?
But who knows. He was all over the place at the time.
dont know about any accusations but I can certainly confirm that from day one I never had a moments problem with the JU52 taking off provided ofcourse one followed the manual on how to take off with a junker. Always worked fine for me. Never understood the issues posted. Taking off like a rocket in 50FT.
Never happened to me. Even went to the trouble of downloading the actual Junker manual which is online from the actual plane.
1 Like
(post deleted by author)
3 Likes
(post deleted by author)
1 Like
ā¦tried the Byrds historic North Pole Flight with the F.VII - but the Arctic is a shining blue coral sea. Was not amused, cancelled.
Anyone has insights into upcoming changes there (just a solid ice pack, maybe winter-summer version, not floating bergs - cant be that difficult).
WU9 - I am the walrus : the - Arctic, Greenland, handcrafted Thule base, Buffalos icefield strips, polar bears, Russian Ice-Breakers, you name itā¦ 
here you can clearly see wind generators for the radios not on obix plane, there was 3 different planes the 1st one had a identification number not a registration number of 1985 for the USA that flew the pacific photo above, where it had a 807 gal tank fitted a 330 gal tank and a 107 gal tank plus 4 92 gal wing tanks, then in Australia it was reg G-AUSU in 1931 it was reg VH-USU there was modifications made in USA and Australia inside when crossing pacific
before modifications were made in USA and it was painted light blue, the door was changed to the left side in 1932 refit and center motor had a 3 blade propeller
before modifications were made in USA and it was painted light blue, the door was changed to the left side in 1932 refit and center motor had a 3 blade propeller
3 Likes
To be fair the stall speeds are based on power off, 1g under the worst conditions (forward CG, max TOW and so on). In ground effect the stall speed is already lower, when adding power and starting a steep climb the load factor is lower than 1 and together with prop-wash over the wings the stall speed will be way lower than published.
In real life this means certain death in case one of the side engines fails as this is all far below the minimum control speed. There is a difference between what the aircraft could do and what you should do. I donāt own the JU so you could be right, just saying that you shouldnāt judge the flight model solely on published stall speeds.
You could of course cut the power in cruise and max. TOW, maintain altitude until stall and see what that looks like.
1 Like
Yoh man, we have to deal with global warming! Completely accurate! 
Taxiing:
This Plane was historically controlled without any Brakes, but by using the Engine to blow over the Rudder and Elevator.
Pushing forward and using Rudder allowed it to turn by making the tail very light or even lifting it off the ground and the rudder would push it left or right. This should already happen at about 2/3rd throttle and without forward movement.
Pulling backward would make the tail very heavy and put a lot of pressure on the tail skid.
This is used for braking after landing and helps keep the aircraft straight.
Ingame it is impossible to do any of this and it relies purely on brakes.
It needs a lot more propwash, like the Cubs have.
(post deleted by author)
2 Likes
I get that and I have no doubt the prop-wash effect is overdone. Iām responding to your comment that the aircraft is able to fly below published stall speeds ā so is any aircraft in the real world.
Looking at the wing loading and big props blowing over the wings the real aircraft is likely also āfloatyā and could take-off in short distance and very low speed, losing an engine doing this wouldnāt end well so nobody in the real world is brave enough to give this a go (I hope).
Not saying the MSFS flight model is correct, but from all of us its speculating as none of us has flown these aircraft.
How does this fly with an Xbox controller on PC? The Edgley Optica from Orbx is absolutely atrocious.
Thank for the feedback so far on this plane! Besides the known issues, weāve documented a few more issues we are seeing here and the team is on it. We are working on an update for this plane but will provide a better timeline and info once we have parsed through everything.
14 Likes
Out of interest, what is the take off speed of a Junker52?
Will we be able to access the cabin in cockpit view using the arrow keys in an update, Jummivana)?
If you are outside in camera drone mode, you can get back there. 
1 Like
The single engine version became my favorite aircraft in the game. That simply.
BUT, I have send an email, as there is a problem about the fuel tanks.
It is not possible to change the fuel tanks on the single engine version. Only one is used, that create a big imbalance during the flight. The levers on the back are moving, but nothing happening.
I have heard thereās also an issue with tri engines, but as I donāt fly it much, I canāt tell you.
Once again congratulations all for the job!
3 Likes
And to update my comment, Iām real life pilot, flown 25 types of aircrafts, including many taildraggers, some old ones, some heavy ones.
Due to my experience, Only by seeing the aerodynamic of the airplane, I am totally sure that the flight model is extremely realistic, so no problems at all on this side.
Once again, very good job 
*Just need to correct the fuel tank selection, then Iāll be off for aime very long flights, and maybe a world tour!
- being able to move inside the cabin would be a nice add too, but not so important.
7 Likes
Love this classic plane.
From the Flight Manuel
STALL SPEED (VS) 44 Kts
MAXIMUM SPEED (VNE) 109 Kts
MANOEVRE SPEED (VNO) 84 Kts
MINIMUM AIR CONTROL SPEED (Vmca) 35 Kts
Maybe folks should RTFM
2 Likes
It flies just fine, no problems atleast for me.
-eelis-